Statistics in Business Decision Making Term Paper

Measurements in Business Decision Making - Term Paper Example As talked about in the presentation that this paper will endeavor to depict factual instruments, for example, mean, standard deviation, change and so forth. These factual instruments regularly go under the heading of graphic insights as they are the fundamental apparatuses used to gather information quantitatively and present in the more important way to reach some consistent determinations from the information gathered. When information is gathered, it is just a crude arrangement of information which may give no insight about the potential data that they may give. Subsequently one significant method of controlling the information will compute the mean or normal of the information. It is likewise critical to take note of that mean qualities may give mutilated data as a result of the anomalies impact. One enormous perception worth can contort the outcomes and mean qualities may turn out to be increasingly swelled because of the effect of exceptions or bigger qualities in the populatio n.Mean esteem is considered as one of the most noteworthy and significant measures particularly in fund. There are different employments of this measure in fund for example from estimating the normal pace of profit for a speculation to figuring the weighted normal pace of return of a portfolio.Similarly, normal qualities are additionally determined for examining the expenses likewise as ideas, for example, normal cost, normal variable costs, normal fixed expenses are significant ideas to comprehend so as to settle on significant business choices in light of the fact that controlling expenses is one of the essential duties of the chiefs.

Impacts of Race on Health Policy System - myassignmenthelp.com

Question: Examine about theImpacts of Race on Health Policy System for Cultural. Answer: Presentation Everybody is qualified for quality and great medicinal services administrations from any clinical office. Your social foundation ought not stop you from getting to clinical offices and getting the necessary treatment. Race can be characterized as the gathering of people dependent on their social, hereditary, physical, social or familial attributes. Bigotry is the segregation, badgering or predispositions of one race by another who sees themselves as better than the others. Prejudice in medicinal services prompts contrasts in access to quality social insurance. The race has been one of the serious issues in Canada that have prompted unforeseen weakness care and those influenced experience issues in getting to quality human services on account of the different social foundations that they are originating from. It is the obligation of the legislature to present wellbeing arrangements that are comprehensive and chivalrous for each Canadian resident. Great wellbeing strategy framework hel p in improving medicinal services for each individual independent of your race and social foundation in wellbeing approach framework; race is a contributory factor to the achievement and adequacy of the framework (Tang, Browne, 2008). A wellbeing arrangement framework that includes bigotry prompts low quality administrations, imbalance in access to medicinal services, disappointed patients and increment in various patients. Prejudice has prompted an expanded number of patients falling back on different options of medicinal services like the custom social insurance for the different diseases. This has likewise lead to the ascent of mortality in patients who are having incessant ailments and are from the minority networks in view of the segregation and absence of sufficient human services. The presentation of comprehensive medicinal services arrangements will help in lessening the death rate and improving social insurance among every Canadian resident. Prejudice in Canada's social insurance strategy framework Prejudice in Canada has since quite a while ago existed with most of the minority bunch comprising blacks have resettled in Quebec. Prejudice in Canada has surpassed numerous different nations, the minority bunches have not completely been perceived by the administration (Hutchison, levesque, Strumpf, Coyle, 2011). Anyway much the administration today is attempting to change the recognition and diminishing the degree of segregation of the minority bunches inside its domain. The minority bunches in Canada have since a long time ago endured in view of poor people and constrained wellbeing offices in the areas where the minority bunches live. This, be that as it may, has prompted the ascent of mortality in the minority bunches particularly those with constant ailment and furthermore maternal mortality. A few reasons for wellbeing imbalances brought about by bigotry are having less access to social assets, for example, instruction, insufficient monetary assets, poor lodging, taking part in wellbeing practices that are hazardous, introduction to condition risks, stress brought about by prejudice in a domain one lives in, social injuries, for example, sexual maltreatment and spousal maltreatment, projects, for example, screening being underutilized and having no trust in the human services frameworks (Prus, Tfaily, Lin, 2010). The administration has the duty of assuming a significant job in lessening bigotry in Canada by making great arrangements that doesn't just support the white individuals in getting effective social insurance yet rather think of strategies that guarantees that entrance to essential human services is everybody's privilege regardless of your race, clan, shading, and social foundation, it ought to be broadened (Papadopoulos, 2006). Social insurance associations likewise have an equivalent duty of guaranteeing fairness in the human services offices. The human services associations can present projects that are social decent variety situated with the points of preparing wellbeing professionals about social assorted variety and capability. This program should concentrate on the underestimated gatherings and how they can get quality human services. The human services associations should enroll people from the minority bunches in the medicinal services framework to make a free and favorable condition for the minority gatherings to feel good and safe in the social insurance offices. The greater part of the prepared social insurance professionals from minority bunches regularly return to their districts to offer human services benefits in the accessible wellbeing offices and this is another method of advancing satisfactory medicinal services for the minority gatherings. Ontario Human Right Commission (OHRC) has set up strategies that shield the minority bunches from being mistreated and denied equivalent option to get to clinical offices and other government open assets (Deber, Mah, 2014). Open and policymakers' obligation People in general and policymakers have the duty to take up activities so as to take out the issue of bigotry in the medicinal services framework. Such activities include making and expanding open mindfulness on the issue of prejudice and its consequences for the quality and availability of medicinal services (Giesbrecht, Crooks, 2016). The mindfulness can be expanded through the help of approaches and strategies that address bigotry, the foundation of network, gatherings and collusion programs that battle the issue of prejudice. Increment in the portrayal of the radicalized bunches in the dynamic procedures just as in the association's structure will help in dispensing with the bigotry in Canada (Clavier, Leeuw, 2013). People in general and policymakers should hardship in executing and upholding approaches and methods that are liberated from bigotry. The enrollment and holding of staff from the minority gatherings will help in building a culture of assorted variety in the wellbeing, usage of projects that include preparing the experts on against unfair and socially different medicinal services. The accessibility of translators in the offices will likewise help take out bigotry in the human services framework. Bolster the foundation of acts and strategies that address the bigotry in medicinal services framework and furthermore distribute adequate assets on the side of prejudice examine, in leading conversations with the partners on killing the bigotry in the nation (Westhues, Wharf, 2012). The policymakers ought to guarantee the patients practice their privileges to get to legitimate medicinal services through the acquaintance of a protest box with air their grievances just as to professional effectively react to bigotry. A thought to frame a board of trustees that addresses on racial fairness will likewise help in managing the pr ejudice issue in the Canadians wellbeing strategy framework. Outline The issue of bigotry, in Canada, can't be disregarded as it profoundly influences the social insurance framework. It is a significant issue that ought to be tended to by all the partners who incorporate the administration, the medicinal services suppliers, and associations, the customers' and the overall population. All the partners ought to join in actualizing and authorizing approaches and methods that maintains correspondence and battles to dispose of prejudice in the human services frameworks. References Harpsichord, C., Leeuw, E. J. J. (2013).Health advancement and the strategy procedure. Deber, R. B., Mah, C. L. (2014).Case examinations in Canadian wellbeing strategy and the board. Giesbrecht, D., Crooks, A., (2016). Spot, Health and Diversity: Learning from the Canadian experience. Routledge. Hutchison, B., levesque, J. F., Strumpf, E., Coyle, N. (2011). Essential medicinal services in Canada:systems in motion.The Milbank Quarterly,89(2), 256-288. Papadopoulos, I. (2006).Transcultural wellbeing and social consideration: Development of socially equipped professionals. Edinburgh: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone Prus, S. G., Tfaily, R., Lin, Z. (2010). Contrasting racial and foreigner wellbeing status and social insurance access in later life in Canada and the United States.Canadian Journal on Aging/La Revue canadienne du vieillissement,29(3), 383-395. Tang, S. Y., Browne, A. J., (2008). Racematters: racialization and populist talks including Aboriginal individuals in the Canadian social insurance context.Ethnicity and Health,13(2), 109-127. Westhues, A., Wharf, B. (2012).Canadian social strategy: Issues and points of view.

Flixbus

Flixbus In Munich we meet Jochen Engert, co-founder of the long distance bus marketing company Flixbus.Jochen talks about how he started the company while studying for his PhD, describes the business model and what makes it unique, and shares some insights in the problems and learnings of growing the company to now more than 120 employees.Interviewer: Hi. Today we are in Munich at Flixbus office with Jochen. Jochen, who are you and what do you do?Jochen: Hi. Welcome here. I am Jochen, one of the founders of Flixbus. I’m responsible for everything we do on marketing, sales and the finance part. I’ve been doing something completely different to the bus industry before, classical management consulting, started a PhD thesis which I had to beak up to start the bus business. Since the market was deregulated last year, this was just the opportunity for us to start the business.Interviewer: When did you have this idea of starting such a business?Jochen: We initially thought about it quite some t ime ago. It started in 2009 when the last government had written down their coalition contract where they said we are going to deregulate the market. And we were like that sounds interesting, how often does that happens that markets still get deregulated. We thought about it in the first place saying there is probably going to be Deutsche Bahn coming in and they’re just going to fill up the market and there is no chance to actually develop a new business. And then maybe a year or a year and half later, Deutsche Bahn said the market is not going to be attractive, it’s not profitable, we’re not going to do it. And we were like, oh, maybe it’s still there and we got back to the idea and started discussing business models again. In the end turns out to be a combination of classical online marketing e-commerce business of selling tickets online, and something that is very real â€" the bus is pretty real, as real as it can get. And the bus industry and company owners that we work with are very weird in a way but cool to work with. And that combination is unique for us, and that again in a market that recently got deregulated. So it was that once in a lifetime opportunity which we had to take.Interviewer: You started this company while you were studying for PhD, what was the final trigger that made you switch from being a student to becoming an entrepreneur?Jochen: Actually that phase took quite some time to go from having a well-paid job, the PhD part, finalizing the thesis, to saying, okay I have to leave all this behind and be an entrepreneur. But in the end we were like this is a once in a lifetime chance, we’re probably going to be pretty sad if we don’t do it, and we are always going to think that we missed out on something, so we just had to do it at some point.Interviewer: Let’s talk about the business model of Flixbus. Can you tell us briefly how it works?Jochen: Basically it’s pretty comparable to what franchises do, like the McDonald’s ou t there. We do everything that goes with the product, we do the scheduling, the network planning, we do the bus branding, we do all the marketing, communications, we do everything that goes with sales, IT, ticketing, etc., and we do all the service towards the customer. Once the customer calls in, he’s going to reach our colleagues, once he writes an e-mail he reaches us. We do the operations and the bus driving part pretty much together with the local partners. It’s medium sized private companies throughout Germany, we work with over 50 companies across the country, and they do the operations for us. They will bring in the assets, they bring in the drivers, they drive the buses for us, and they deliver the product the way we want them to deliver.On top of that, we have a revenue sharing model, so once a line goes very well they’re going to be very profitable, once it’s not going so well we’re going to share the risk of utilization with them. And that leaves us with a grea t incentive to do good marketing, to do good sales, to have our efforts focused on that part, and it leaves them with an incentive to deliver good quality, clean buses, friendly drivers, good quality service, and that is our business model.Interviewer: When you started with this business model, did you focus on specific roots, like Munich to Berlin or something like that?Jochen: Our approach was that we have to provide a nationwide network. So in whatever bigger city you’re looking for a connection to another city you have to find some offer on our website. That was the initial idea. And at the beginning we thought we can start with the whole network all at once, but obviously that usually doesn’t work. So we had to be a little pragmatic at the beginning. We focused on the bigger roots so we can connect bigger cities, such as Munich, Hamburg, Berlin, Frankfurt, Cologne, etc., and then develop the network over time. We started with only ten buses and now we are running over 150 b uses throughout Germany every day, also connecting cities in other countries across the borders. As I said, you’ve got to be pragmatic at some point. So we just had to start and get going, and in the end it turns out there is no chance we can start with the whole network at once, but you have to develop the processes over time and get into what the business model in all detail looks like.Interviewer: How did you acquire the first bus operator?Jochen: It’s pretty much like investors for us. It’s been a long time for us to visit them, we have been traveling throughout Germany to visit bus companies, talk to them, and say look this is the market, it’s going to develop, it’s going to be fast, it’s going to be really big, and it’s going to be attractive for all of us. We are going to concentrate on what we do best, which is marketing and sales, and you’re going to do the operations, don’t you want to work with us? And it’s usually been like an investor, you can imagin e it’s usually family-owned businesses, the father built up the company 50 or 60 years ago, the son took it over, and now he’s in the position to say I want to do something with the company. There is no growth in their core businesses, they’re doing travel, they’re doing local public transportation, and there is no growth in that, so they also have the chance to have their business developing. And then it’s really an investor pitch, you’ve got to persuade them to invest hundreds of thousands of Euros in parts, millions of Euros in the buses and the drivers and the operational costs. That takes a lot of discussion, a lot of arguments, a lot of persuasion to bring them to that point.Interviewer: So basically your pitch was like this, “Hey guys, you have your local business with your local buses, we can make you national. But in order for you to become national we need to invest in some buses with our brand name.”Jochen: Exactly. We said, look, you’re very good at ope rations, we’re good at marketing and sales, let’s bring that together and let’s build that big brand throughout Germany. We’re going to bring you together with different partners across the country, and we’re going to build what we do now, and Flixbus is providing over 1000 connections throughout Germany. In the end it appealed to enough partners to actually start the business.Interviewer: How much traction did you need in order to, let us say, fill up the buses sufficiently?Jochen: At the beginning there was a lot of PR and media around it, so that obviously helped us and helped the market to come to the awareness of the people. At the beginning â€" again, this is pretty common â€" there’s been early adopters like younger people, students, who tried it out and then they spread the word. And usually people are very satisfied with our services. It’s really low price, you can go Munich-Berlin for like 15 Euros if you book early, and there is no cheaper way to get there. And then people are usually surprised how comfortable the buses are today. When you think about buses you usually have in mind there was my granny going somewhere over the weakened, like it’s old-fashioned, but we also changed the image of going by bus. There’s free Wi-Fi on board, it’s really comfortable, usually the driver is quite friendly, and it’s quite nice service, and that changed the whole picture and image on buses. That still helps us to get traction on the whole thing.Interviewer: This is also related to that local operators bought new buses which have an economical advantage over the old buses?Jochen: Absolutely. Our bus feed I think on average is one and half years old at the most. They usually have brand new buses bought for us in our specifications, we define the life space you need to have there, obviously there’s toilets, there’s Wi-Fi, etc. And that also gives you an operation cost advantage, because they are much more efficient in long-distance operat ions than older buses.Interviewer: What are the key performance indicators that you’re trying to manage?Jochen: Obviously from a marketing and sales perspective, it’s the classical one, it’s CPO, it’s customer acquisition cost, it’s the overall marketing budget we spend there, it’s the service cost per ticket, these kinds of KPIs, and we measure traffic conversion, etc. Operationally, we look into how do we get line operations as cost-effective as possible, and that has a lot to do with the geography, where is the bus partner sitting, because you have certain limitations on bus driver availability, how long are they actually allowed to drive a bus, and when do they have to change.And that goes along with a really complex network planning. We have pretty, let’s call them, nerdy mathematics guys do the network planning, and that’s pretty complex, and we really focus on cost-efficiency there. So you look into how much does it cost to operate the bus between Munich and B erlin, how do we optimize that, and there’s a lot of KPIs in there, we usually measure that in Euros per kilometers, that’s what we optimize on. And then, again, prices are very important for us. We look into what do we earn per kilometer per ticket, and that’s the core KPIs that we look for.Interviewer: Let’s talk about the corporate strategy. One thing I would be very interested in is how you would try to generate a competitive advantage, and whether it is possible to make this business profitable on a low-scale, or whether you don’t really need a high scale?Jochen: It’s quite interesting, because in the market at the moment we’re playing against large corporations, we’re playing against Deutsche Bahn, again ADAC and Post and some other corporates as well. From a startup perspective, our advantage is to do good marketing and to be very efficient in what we do on online and performance marketing. That’s like the competitive advantage that we have as a startup. Als o we are very flexible with our partners, so we change routes every day, every week, we’re flexible to adjust in our offer. And on the other part you need a certain scale to be able to do that profitably, especially the part that we do with marketing and the sales has a lot of synergy as to the size you doing the business. So that leaves us with certain growth demand that we have, and we’re going to grow the business quite aggressively. We’re going to extend our offer till the end of the year and we’re going to still double it again.This also brings us to the point where we say is Germany going to be enough. Germany is the biggest mobility market in Europe, but we still think that also in other markets there is no business model that actually compares to what we do and the way we do it, coming from that online ecommerce part and bringing that to transportation coming, which are two very far away parts. So we are also going to do that in other countries, we are going to bring Flixbus at the beginning to other cities that are closer to Germany, so we’re going to connect Prague, we’re going to connect, Vienna, Amsterdam, Paris, etc. And then we’re going to bring the whole model also to other countries.Again that leaves you with a scale advantage on what to do on the over overhead parts, the marketing, sales, IT, etc. And also on the product side, if you look at other countries there are some bus services on okay quality, but in most countries it’s pretty shabby. We think we can bring a better product to the people there too.Interviewer: What I would be very interested in is how are the different markets close to Germany related to the bus or transportation in general?Jochen: Germany has been a train market ever since the law protected Deutsche Bahn from competition, it’s just been that way. So now that it has opened up the market it’s rapidly developing and it’s growing fast. But also in other countries the market structure is really what di fferentiates. If you look to France, for example, they have a situation that is comparable to Germany, about one or two years before deregulation, so you’re still not allowed to offer inter-city bus trips. We’ll see where that goes, it might be very interesting because we have a similar situation with the local train companies there.In Spain, for example, there is a bus network, there’s large players, but they’re more like corporates, slow, conservative. It might be interesting too. If you look into Italy, it’s very fragmented, you’ve a lot of small players that provide individual lines, there is no overall brand marketing. Different market situation, but also interesting.And then if you look into Eastern Europe, there’s loads of smaller providers too. The bus is that one means of transportation there, they usually don’t have very good train networks, so the bus market is very mature, the way that people buy the product is not very mature at all.Interviewer: And that is where you come into play.Jochen: That’s where we might come into play. So there’s different situations in all countries, and we’re thinking about what is our go-to market strategy in these individual counties, and what’s the timeframe in which we are going to do it. We are in the middle of that discussion, and we’re probably going to look into next year to take that expansion step towards other countries.Interviewer: In Europe, which market is the most developed? Because when I was in the UK I was traveling by bus from city to city, and it was quite cheap. So how big is the market in the UK, how much sales are the bus transportation companies doing?Jochen: UK is probably the most developed market if you look into bus services. There’s National Express and Stagecoach, they’re the two big players, and their total market value should be around 350 to 400 million. Germany is going to be like three times that size at least.Interviewer: Driven by what, why is the size in Germany supposed to be much bigger?Jochen: Because the structure is different. If you look at other countries, France is very Paris-centric, UK is pretty London-centricâ€"Interviewer: They don’t travel a lot.Jochen: Londoners don’t travel too much around the country, true. In German it’s different, you have a lot of centers, there’s Munich, there’s Berlin, there’s Hamburg, Frankfurt, Cologne, and there’s all this area. So there’s big cities, big centers, and people are traveling a lot more. So if you look into overall traffic volume and compare that to other countries, you can easily project how big the market is going to be. If we just take the share of the bus in other countries and take that to Germany, it easily comes to a volume of over a billion Euros.Interviewer: The next thing I would be very interested in is what is your forecast for the market development in countries like Italy or Germany in terms of fragmentation, whether there’s going to be some conso lidation cases. And the second thing, what would be your forecast for countries like France where they’re currently regulated, whether they will deregulate someone as well?Jochen: If I look at Germany, there is going to be a consolidation phase. There won’t be ten or fifteen players around because it just doesn’t make sense. As I said, you need a certain level of scale to be able to provide good service. So we are going to be seeing consolidation here. Timing-wise, it’s really difficult to say when it is going to happen. We are sure we are going to play a very active part in that. In other countries there has either already been consolidation, Spain has maybe one or two players dominating the market, UK is the same. In Italy we’ll where that goes. At the moment there’s a lot of players. Especially with the online and the marketing part there might be consolidation over the next years too. And then we will see where this is going.For us we think that in our business model we are one of the driving forces also for market development. So the demand is just there, the demand is growing, people will always look for a cheap mobility, and it’s just a question of how we approach that.Interviewer: And for the regulation in France, what would be your forecast?Jochen: Difficult to say. It’s always difficult to look into politicians too deep. We are looking at the market, we are closely following what’s happening, and there might be a comparable development to what’s happened in Germany. It’s not given that large transport companies are going to take the market, and the same with Germany, people were surprised and Deutsche Bahn is still very surprised how fast the market developed, and why shouldn’t that happen in the same way in France?Interviewer: I totally understand why Deutsche Bahn is moving very aggressively into this market, because they don’t want to cannibalize their core business.Jochen: That’s what they still say, that was the same speech that airlines gave fifteen years ago, why should we go into low-cost airlines, and now Lufthansa is working with Germanwings together, and you see that in other countries too, and Ryanair is the most profitable airline in the world. So they are underestimating the market still, and we’ll see how that develops over time.Interviewer: We always try to give our readers some kind of advice on how they can become better entrepreneurs. I would be interested in your advice for first-time entrepreneurs.Jochen: If I look into what we learned over time there’s probably two things that are most important. One is we have had a lot of senior advisers, we had business angels in the beginning, and they were just going to give us some advice, and we thought we know better anyways. It would be better to have his opinion , but we know better. And in the end it turns out they were always right. So my advice would be to really listen to what they’re saying. If you have senior guys that you trust â€" and we do trust them because they’re one of our first business angels, really cools guy, we really trust him, we should have listened in the first place and not make the same mistakes over and over again. So if you have senior advice, just listen to these guys and follow.Interviewer: That is one very good point, because when people ask me about this I always tell them you have two conditions that you need to test. First condition is, is the other guy in a position to know better than you? And the second thing is, does he want the best for you and wants to help you? And if both conditions, and only both conditions, are positive, then listen and follow this advice, please.Jochen: Absolutely true. There are some mistakes that you just have to make yourself to get the learning out of it, we’re doing it every day, we are living trial and error. Especially in the marketing side, we are trying out new things, measure if it works, if it doesn’t we just throw it away, if it w orks we continue doing it and scale it up. So trial and error is very important, but, as you are saying, there is no point in not listening to senior guys if you trust them and if they are in your favor, so why shouldn’t you do that.The other part is, as I said in the beginning, at some point you just have to be pragmatic and just go and do it. There’s always going to be difficulties and you never know if it’s going to work out or not, but at some point you just have to go and do it. We came to hate that guy called Murphy, if you know Murphy’s Law. We do a transportation company, and we didn’t estimate that dimension in that beginning, and we do processes today, we were like if this comes and that and that, this this not very likely that this happens and that, and then the process should be like that, and we’re like, it’s going to be exactly like that. The most unlikely event is still going to happen with us, because with the pure number of passengers we’re transport ing everything is going to happen. So we have to adjust our processes to that point, but still you’ve got to be pragmatic at some point, you’ve just got to start and just go and do it and then improve over time. That’s one of the most important learning we took.Interviewer: One other learning was also very interesting, because you convinced local operators to basically invest in your business, not really on your balance sheet, but at least they put some money the floor. What advice can you give for pitching or acquiring this kind of partners?Jochen: It’s very difficult. You need a certain seniority level, you need to talk to them on eye-level, that’s very important I think. And you need to be fair with them, if they feel you’re going to drag them over the table or try to cheat them or something, they’re not going to work with you. So you need to develop a really fair model that gives risk and chance to both parties in a fair and balanced way. That’s really key. Obvio usly there is some sort of symmetry between us and the operators, we have much more transparency on how the business goes, how the numbers are, etc. But in the end you’ve still got to find a fair and balanced way to work with them. That’s really key. If the other party has an impression â€" and it’s usually on a personal basis â€" that these guys treat me well and treat me in a fair way, then there is a high chance they’re going to work with you.Interviewer: Jochen, thank you very much.Jochen: You’re most welcome.

Parenting Styles What They Are and Why They Matter Essay

A parent is not only the loving mother who holds you close to her for nine months and then many years, or the dad who plays baseball with you and intimidates his daughter’s dates. It is someone who is there for you from the start, guiding you to the right path of knowledge and teaching you how to stay on the right path independently. A parent does not need to have any biological associations to the child in order to be a parent to them. A parent must have certain characteristics to be rightfully called a parent. For many years psychologists have defined ways to correctly support a child to adulthood for parents all over the world. Some people conclude their practice of parenting their children after the child reaches the age of 18, and†¦show more content†¦There is Authoritarian, Authoritative, and Permissive. Baumrind is also cited in the journal â€Å"Parenting Style as a Moderator for Students’ Academic Achievement.† (Ishak, Low Lau, 2011) However th e parenting styles as listed by Baumrind in the journal are distinct in character, and much through the levels of responsiveness and demandingness each style has. Maccoby and Martin, who are also cited in the second listed journal, had captured the important elements. Parental Responsiveness is parallel to the emotional support a parent would show to the child to their special needs and demands. The parent would listen to the child’s interests and goals, which can result as motivation for academic achievement if listened to properly and shown the right motivation for achievement. Parental responsiveness can be thought of as a parent â€Å"responding† to their child’s need of emotional support. Parental demandingness refers to the expectations of that parent of the child. This can range from expecting higher grades, better performance and excellent behavior. (Ishak, Low Lau, 2011) Authoritative Parenting is high in both demanding and responsiveness. The parent would have high expectations of the child in the household and classroom, along with rules however, with the high level of responsiveness there is more communication and reasoning behind the expectations and more emotional support to ensure a healthy relationshipShow MoreRelatedThe, What Makes A Perfect Parent, Raises The Question Essay1630 Words   |  7 PagesChapter 5 of Freakonomics, What Makes a Perfect Parent, raises the question, â€Å"how much do parents really matter?† This is a very interesting question with a number of different answers. Steven Levitt, the author, goes into great detail to answer this question. Right of the start, Levitt mentions, â€Å"Clearly bad parenting matters a great deal† (Levitt, Dubner p.154). He uses the correlation between abortion and crime, making the argument that unwanted children will be worse off in life versus otherRead MoreThe Fbi Behavior Analysis Unit1443 Words   |  6 PagesPsychology Parenting Styles The FBI Behavior Analysis Unit can profile a person down to the type of household they grew up in. Behavior as an adult, especially of a psychopath, is usually in correlation to a traumatic event of their childhood, usually involving their parents. The FBI has the ability to analyze all the behaviors of a person and tell you what kind of car they are mostly likely to drive, what profession they are most likely involved in, and in most cases, links to why their behaviorRead MoreDiana Baumrinds Parenting Styles in Psychology784 Words   |  3 Pagesthe three parenting styles in psychology, authoritarian parenting, authoritative parenting, and permissive parenting. All of these parenting styles are seen today throughout everyone’s lives. All of these parenting styles can affect a person differently and studies have shown that depending on what style a person has been raised with can affect whom that person becomes and how they behave in life. The first style of parenting is authoritarian parenting. In this style of parenting, childrenRead MoreParenting Styles988 Words   |  4 PagesPARENTING STYLES: EAST OR WEST? Name School Parenting Styles: East or West? Parenthood is a privilege but is also a great responsibility. Parents wish there was a manual that came along with children when they were born; however, that is not the case and parents can only do their best in different situations. How parents act in child rearing is called parenting styles, and geographically speaking there is a wide variety of styles practiced. The most controversial styles are the ones adoptedRead MoreParenting Styles And Their Influence On Children951 Words   |  4 Pageswhich style best fits their beliefs and abilities. Many parents come to the conclusion that they will try their best and just hope that their children learn right from wrong and the abilities they need to succeed in life. However, what most parents do not always realize is that the style of parenting they are using may have a bigger impact on their child than they are aware of. For the sake of these parents and their sanity, as well as the children’s, I have classified these styles of parenting intoRead MoreParenting : A Balancing Act1525 Words   |  7 PagesParenting: A Balancing Act When the term, â€Å"Chinese family,† comes to mind, it can often be associated with words or qualities such as prosperity, diligence, intelligence, superintendence, and even negligence. These associations, however, did not just appear out of thin air. Children raised under a Chinese parenting style often corner the markets in areas concerning child prodigies, successful students, and assiduous workers. Most of the aforementioned qualities of these children can be attributedRead MoreEffects Of Parenting Styles992 Words   |  4 PagesParenting styles can be highly impressionable on their children.  There are various styles of parenting, and each style can have different effects on the child or adolescent.  The four parenting styles that can be implemented in the household are recognized as: authoritarian, neglectful, permissive, and authoritative. All four of these styles carry their own unique characteristics, and have some distinct features. Whichever style a parent dec ides is best to use for their child can have multiple shortRead MoreWhy Chinese Mothers Are Superior By Amy Chua Summary782 Words   |  4 Pagesbragging rights of well-educated, career driven and disciplined descendants, which is an important factor in todays society; however, such parenting can lead teens to experience psychological effects such as depression and ultimately suicide. Regardless of concerned critics, Amy Chua remains positive on the result of tiger parenting. She believes that this parenting enables her children to be successful and she expects nothing but the best. On the contrary, the recipient of such harsh treatment inRead MoreThe Authoritarian Style Of Parenting Essay1414 Words   |  6 Pageschild-parent behavior, seeking to identify parenting styles. The Baumrid study and other further studies identified four main styles of parenting (Miller, 2010): the authoritative parenting style was characterized by fair rules and consequences; The Authoritarian parent ing style was characterized by strict rules and harsh punishment; the permissive parenting style was characterized by minimal rules with little or no consequences; the uninvolved parenting style was characterized by no rules, and parentRead MoreThe Four Basic Types Of Parenting Styles1337 Words   |  6 PagesAccording to Arnett’s book on human development, the four basic types of parenting styles that exist are categorized as neglectful, permissive, authoritative, and authoritarian. Ideally, according to Arnett’s findings, most parents should aim to be authoritative parents, meaning they should aim to posses essential qualities in order to ensure successful communication with their child. Authoritative parents are described as flexible with their children, supportive, and democratic. However, they should

The Factor that Determining the Efficiency of Distribution of Zakat in Sibu, Sarawak - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 3 Words: 770 Downloads: 4 Date added: 2019/10/10 Category Religion Essay Tags: Islam Essay Did you like this example? 1.0 Background of the Study The literal meaning of Zakat can be defined as pure, blessing, good, grow and renowned. Zakat is the third pillar from the five fundamental pillars of Islam. With e well functioning Zakat, it enables economic growth and income equality, in other words, economy with equity (Ahmad Muflih,1986). The government should be accountable in collecting and distributing zakat funds for a few reasons (Yusuf, 2000). Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "The Factor that Determining the Efficiency of Distribution of Zakat in Sibu, Sarawak" essay for you Create order There are two important roles of Zakat institutions which are collecting and distributing Zakat funds. But nowadays, the distributing of Zakat has become a big issue. Therefore, this research aims to study the factor that determining the efficiency of distribution of Zakat in Sibu. The findings of this study will explain the method and the effectiveness of distribution of Zakat in Sibu. By doing this study also we will get to recognize the challenges that been encounter by the Zakat institutions in Sarawak in distributing the Zakat fund. 2.0 Problem Statement Zakat is the third pillar in Pillars of Islam. It is vital for Malaysia to have a proper zakat management to demonstrate a good image of Islam. The systematic and effective of zakat management will increase the zakat payers confidence in paying their zakat. According to Muhammad Syukri (2002, p. 2), in Malaysia, the zakat collection has been increased averagely from year to year. For 2012, the total Zakat collected from Pusat Pungutan Zakat (PPZ) Selangor is RM451 million, where this amount is exceeding the target set for that year. These total collections have shown and increasing value in Zakat collection for 2011 which is only RM 394.1 million. However, even though the management of Zakat collection getting better from year to year, but when it comes to Zakat distribution, it is still become a big issue. The difficulty with the distribution methods, zakat distribution to the qualified and unqualified asnaf, the problem with poverty that is still happen even though the zakat distribution has been implemented, some zakat institution having shortage zakat fund while some having surplus, are among the issues that has decreased the performance and achievement of the zakat institution itself (Mohamed Dahan 1998; Abdullah 1999). This show the unjustice in Muslim economics and lead to the bad impression of the ability towards Zakat institutions. 3.0 Significance of the Study As a result, this situation creates an interest in the researcher to perform study to review the method of distribution of Zakat and its effectiveness, the factor that determining the efficiency of Zakat and the challenges in distributing Zakat. This research is to find a solution for better way in distributing Zakat in smaller community at Sibu. These research findings can help in improving the efficiency of distribution of Zakat, assist in increase Zakat payers confident toward Zakat institutions by paying their Zakat and help to makes a better strategy for the Tabung Baitulmal Sarawak in increasing their Zakat profesionalisme in Zakat management. This research also significance to a better development of Islamic economy. 4.0 Research Objective Based on the above discussion, the research objective for this study are; 1. To find out the method of distribution of Zakat in Sibu and their effectiveness. 2. To investigate factors determining the efficiency of Zakat distribution in Sibu. 3. To examine the challenges that Tabung Baitulmal Sarawak encounter in distribution of Zakat. 5.0 Research Question In order to meet the objectives of the research, there are few research questions that are conducted in this research. The following are the research questions of this research: 1. How is Zakat distributed in Sibu? 2. What are the factors that determining the efficiency of Zakat distribution in Sibu? 3. What are the challenges that Tabung Baitulmal Sarawak encounter in distribution of Zakat in Sibu? 6.0 Expected Contribution This study expected to help, Tabung Baitulmal Sarawak (TBS) for Sibu area to improve their efficiency in distributing Zakat. When the result of this study indicates the challenges that the institutions encounter, the TBS can come out a strategy to improve their effectiveness in distribution of Zakat in Sibu. Through this new strategy proposed, it is hoped that TBS can increase the profesionalisme of Zakat management and also increase the confidence of the zakat payers. This later will contribute to increasing number of zakat funds and indirectly help the capability of asnaf to improve their life. 7.0 Conclusion As conclusion, this study is vital to increase the confidence of people towards our Zakat institutions. By providing an efficiency and a transparent system of Zakat management, this will attract more people to pay Zakat. Since the collection of Zakat is no longer become an issue in managing Zakat, thus, the government play an important role in finding a solution in enhancing and improving Zakat distribution to Asnaf.

Knowledge Management Free Essays

Knowledge management in an organisation means to capture the knowledge that is critical to them, constantly improve it and make it available in the most effective manner to those who need it. There are two types of knowledge explicit and tacit. Explicit knowledge is a kind of knowledge that can be expressed in formed E. We will write a custom essay sample on Knowledge Management or any similar topic only for you Order Now g following a procedure. Tacit knowledge is influenced by emotions and beliefs E. g Respect, relationships. Bovis case study throws a light how knowledge management can be difficult for organisations operating globally. There is friction in transfer of knowledge due to cultural factors and sometimes even due to language barriers. Bovis model helps reduce these frictions. In his model group cohesion among members of the knowledge mnanagement team was promoted so that communication barriers are removed. There was weekly conference calls, also team meeting every 6 months in different geographic locations. To remove language barrier english was made as the base language and e-mail acted as a mechanism that communicated queries and solutions in a commom base vehicle. Hoarding of knowledge is a common practice which can lead to limitations to successful communication of knowledge between providers and seekers. Bovis model helps to mitigate these limitations through motivational tactics and linking employee usage to performance reviews. The success of the bovis model lies in the knowledge management team structure and the method he adopted to monitor the success of the knowledge management initiative. Bovis model shows how complex isuues associated with successful implementation of knowledge management in business can be dealt. How to cite Knowledge Management, Papers Knowledge management Free Essays string(40) " what happens between one’s ears\." Prussia core tenet of any organizational learning project is that without detecting and correcting errors in â€Å"what we know† and â€Å"how we learn,† an organization’s knowledge deteriorates, becomes obsolete, and can result in â€Å"bad† decisions. Because systematic attention to knowledge management is relatively recent, it is particularly important to detect these errors so that knowledge management does not become yet another management fad that promised much but delivered little. If we do not identify and try to resolve these errors, â€Å"what we know† about knowledge management may become little else but mythology. We will write a custom essay sample on Knowledge management or any similar topic only for you Order Now As a consequence, we will be faced with the ultimate knowledge irony: efforts to manage knowledge are themselves based upon faulty knowledge principles. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to a set of pervasive knowledge management errors. These reflections are based on the authors’ observing or partaking in over one hundred knowledge projects over the past five years or so. The focus is on fundamental errors, that is, errors that if left unredeemed inhibit genuine knowledge from being developed and leveraged. These are errors associated with he concept of knowledge itself: how knowledge is understood in organizational settings and how that understanding impedes knowledge management. Error l: Not Developing a Working Definition of Knowledge If knowledge is not something that is different from data or information, then there is nothing new or interesting in knowledge management. Yet many managers seem determinedly reluctant to distinguish between data and CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOLVO, NO. 3 SPRING 1998 265 The Eleven Deadliest Sins of Knowledge Management information on the one hand and knowledge on the other; and, more importantly, hey seem reluctant to consider the implications of these distinctions. The tendency to avoid grappling with what knowledge is should not be surprising. There is little in the education, training, or organizational experience of managers that prepares them for the deep-seated reflection and understanding required by the concept of knowledge. Moreover, this situation is exacerbated by some recent popular management literature that directly advocates not making distinctions between these concepts. The argument advanced by these authors is that contemplation of such extinctions distracts managers from the necessary task of managing,’ However, reflection upon concepts and the distinctions among and between them is the essence of the process of â€Å"knowing† or learning. This is a critical error. It contributes directly to all of the errors noted below. Also, avoidance of grappling with a working understanding of knowledge leads to a dysfunctional environment for knowledge work. Many executives have told us they were extremely reluctant to even use the knowledge word and that they felt the anti- knowledge culture of their organizations compelled them to do knowledge work by dealt. â€Å"We had to disguise our knowledge project within a data warehousing architecture plan† is a true and representative response. In fairness, firms have been assaulted, at least since the asses, with multitudes of theories and nostrums that have often proved to be of questionable value. This has made many executives skeptical, if not downright hostile, to new ideas and programs. Error 2: Envisaging Knowledge Stock to the Detriment of Knowledge Flow When knowledge is equated with information, it should not be a surprise to find it defined principally as a stock rather than as a flow. It is viewed as a thing or object that exists on its own, that can be captured, transmitted among individuals, and stored in multiple ways within the organization. Indisputably, this â€Å"stock† perspective tends to dominate organizations’ thinking about knowledge. This has come about in part because several early examples of knowledge â€Å"success† focus on articulated and documented stocks of knowledge such as Dhow’s work on patent values and Muckiness’s rapid-response system. The notion of flow, however, suggests a radically different conception of knowledge. It is in constant flux and change. It is central to day-to-day doing and being. Individuals create it and it is largely self-generating. Moreover, it connects, binds, and involves individuals. In short, it is inseparable from the individuals who develop, transmit, and leverage it. The prevalent view of knowledge as stock is grounded in large measure in the thrust of every educational system from grade school through university: learn the facts and regurgitate them as required in the relevant examination. 266 VOLVO 40, NO. 3 This orientation is in turn reflected in and reinforced by the pervasive information genealogy approach to the management of data and information: capture, store, retrieve, and transmit. Although organizations obviously need to manage their data and information using these technology-centered models, knowledge is a substantially different thing and thus needs different models. The implications for how organizations approach all facets of knowledge management are profound. In many firms, knowledge simply becomes another object to be managed. It is viewed as something separate from the organizational processes that help generate and nurture it. Not surprisingly, therefore, managers all too often do not see themselves s part of the knowledge process, but rather see it as happening outside of them. Error 3: Viewing Knowledge as Existing Predominantly Outside the Heads of Individuals Implicit in the observations above is that any discussion of knowledge is meaningless in the absence of a â€Å"knower,† Knowledge is what a knower knows; there is no knowledge without someone knowing it. Knowledge therefore must be viewed as originating â€Å"between the ears† of individuals. Taken literally, the need for a knower raises profound questions as to whether and how knowledge can exist outside the heads of individuals. Although knowledge can be represented in and often embedded in organizational processes, routines, and networks, and sometimes in document repositories, it cannot truly originate outside the heads of individuals. A Nor is it ever complete outside of an individual. In this view, knowledge is shaped by (among other things) one’s initial stock of knowledge, what goes on inside one’s head (that is, how one reasons), and the inflow of new stimuli (such as new data and information). Flow, therefore, is also central to what happens between one’s ears. You read "Knowledge management" in category "Papers" Yet organizations seem to view knowledge as if it has a life of its own. They dub strikingly mundane databases as â€Å"knowledge bases,† they talk of search engines as if they were human brains, and they extol executive expert systems as if the human mind were incidental to their construction and use. This attempt to dress up decades old technologies and concepts in new â€Å"knowledge† clothing is one of the more serious distractions faced by knowledge advocates. In conjunction with an emphasis upon knowledge as stock, this error reinforces organizational tendencies to manage and massage ever more complex and interconnected databases and to construct even more elaborate information structures. This would not be so bad except that it shifts the focus of knowledge and knowledge work away from individuals?without whom knowledge can be neither generated, transmitted, nor used. VOLVO 40, NO, 3 267 The Eleven Deadliest Sins of Knowledge Management Error 4: Not Understanding that a Fundamental Intermediate Purpose of Managing Knowledge Is to Create Shared Context If knowledge exists ultimately within individuals, and it is individuals participating simultaneously in multiple group processes who make and execute key decisions, then a fundamental purpose of â€Å"managing knowledge† must be to build some degree of shared context. Shared context† means a shared understanding of an organization’s external and internal worlds and how these worlds are connected. Shared context is dynamic: knowledge as flow implies that any shared understanding is likely to change over time, and sometimes may do so suddenly. In the absence of shared context, individuals’ differing perspectives, beliefs, assumptions, and views of the future are most likely to collide and thus immobile decision making. Yet many organizations still appear so caught up in the model of knowledge as stock that explicating, challenging, and aligning distinct views receives little systematic attention. In short, individuals’ understanding of the world around them?perhaps the most critical link between knowledge and decision making?is ignored. This error obviously stems from a â€Å"stock† view of knowledge, but its roots lie deep in the prevailing cultures of most organizations. Establishing, challenging, and aligning shared context requires decision makers to engage in open, honest, supportive (and yet critical), and reflective dialogue. ‘ However, knowledge is a direct outcome of experiences, reflection, and dialogue?three activities that use up that most precious managerial asset: namely, time. Few firms feel they can afford to budget directly for these activities, yet little knowledge is ever developed without them. A disregard for shared context means that the generation, transmission, and use of knowledge is not seen as an activity that brings individuals to deeper understanding through dialogue. As a result, information remains simply a pattern of disjointed and ill-structured data points or events. Without such dialogue the path from information to knowledge is difficult to traverse. Error 5: Paying Little Heed to the Role and Importance of Tacit Knowledge A â€Å"head centered† (or perhaps, more accurately, an embodied) view recognizes the central role of tacit knowledge in shaping and influencing explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge entails a body of perspectives (e. G. , our view of customers is framed by our firm’s experience in North America), perceptions (customers seem disinclined to try our new product), beliefs (investment in new technology will lead to breakthrough new products that will create new customer needs), and values (do what is right for the customer). Tacit knowledge is the means by which explicit knowledge is captured, assimilated, created, and disseminated. 268 VOLVO. 40, NO. Yet in spite of the emphasis upon tacit knowledge in both traditional epistemology and the recent knowledge management literature, organizations seem especially reluctant to grapple with its management. One unfortunate consequence is that in redoubling their commitment to managing explicit knowledge, organizations discover to th eir dismay that their efforts are thwarted by the very phenomenon they choose to downplay or ignore. As more emphasis is placed upon refining and extending customer satisfaction surveys, managers’ perceptions, projections, and values intervene to preclude any genuinely new insights into customers’ behavior. The most profound reason for this error is that managers simply do not understand the nature of tacit knowledge, its attributes, or its consequences. Thus, although they admit it is â€Å"there,† they fear it is inaccessible and impossible to influence. Thus, their own tacit knowledge about knowledge serves to limit their understanding of the real nature of knowledge?both tacit and explicit. If this error persists, the development and leveraging of explicit knowledge is largely stifled. Consider the following case. One organization considered its extensive services to be the dominant reason its customers continued to do more business with it. In in-depth interviews with many of these customers, however, service was ranked as only the fifth or sixth most important purchase criterion. Yet, key members of the management team not only refused to believe the interview findings, they steadfastly refused to entertain the possibility that their long-held semi-tacit assumption might be wrong. Error 6: Disentangling Knowledge from Its Uses Knowledge is about imbuing data and information with decision- and action-relevant meaning. This is the vital role of human intervention. Information about customers becomes knowledge when decision makers determine how to take advantage of the information. In this way, knowledge is inseparable from thinking and acting (see Error 7). Yet many organizations disconnect knowledge from its uses. A major manifestation of this error is that so-called knowledge initiatives, projects, and programs become ends in themselves. Data warehousing, customer satisfaction surveys, and industry scenarios degenerate respectively into technological challenges, management games, and clashes among proponents of different scenario methodologies. Their relevance for decisions and actions gets lost in the turmoil spawned by debates about appropriate data structures, best survey designs, and alternative techniques for imagining specific industry futures. This error arises directly from a number of decisively false assumptions in the way many organizations approach knowledge management. First, access to information is not equivalent to insight, value, or utility. Examples of managers recognizing in retrospect how they should have derived insight from particular data and information are legend in every company. Second, the value of data 269 ND information is often anything but obvious. Sometimes it is only after considerable discussion and dialogue that the decision relevance and usefulness of data and information becomes evident. Discerning the appropriate marketing strategy responses to new requests of key customers often requires extensive analysis and detailed projections of the forces shaping customers’ behaviors. Third, a common tendency to firmly segregate knowledge users (â€Å"decision makers†) from many of those involved in generating knowledge further serves to separate knowledge from its potential uses. The universal use of the term â€Å"knowledge worker,† s distinct from workers who presumably don’t have or use knowledge, is a prime indicator of how common this sort of error is. A recent survey by Mark Fruit on how knowledge is understood and valued at Toshiba points out the fatuousness of these labels. ‘ A critical implication of this error is that the knowledge efforts of many organizations are misdirected. In short, they frequently commit extensive resources and time to refining and perfecting data and information at the expense of deriving decision and action implications. This tendency is vividly manifest in the extraordinary lengths to which many organizations go to ensure that their customer surveys meet every statistical standard, that unbiased questions are posed, and that the data collection process does not influence the results. Only later is it discovered that the data generated is not terribly helpful in many critical marketing decisions and actions (such as the design of new products, changes to current marketing strategy, or development of rapid responses to the actions of competitors). Error 7: Downplaying Thinking and Reasoning Knowledge generation and use at the level of individuals and groups is a never- ending work-in-progress. At its core, however, getting to different states of knowledge development requires some form of reasoning. For example, a sequence of observations about how customers use a product may lead to insights about desired product modifications, potential new customer solutions, or ways in which existing products might be better customized to specific customers’ needs. Explicating thinking and reasoning processes is especially critical in the case of explicit knowledge. Yet it is always a shock to observe how little attention is paid by allegedly well- managed organizations to their modes of reasoning: the nature of the analytics inherent in points of view or arguments; the assumptions underlying particular models and metaphors; or the relationship between a mode of reasoning and its â€Å"logical† outcomes and consequences. Organizations are thus often unaware why changes occur in a particular stock of explicit knowledge. Hence, they are unable to test the rationales for or validity of such changes. While there are many organizational causes of this error (e. . , an organization’s culture does not tolerate articulation and consideration of conflicts in reasoning), the dominance and pervasiveness of tacit knowledge is one of its 270 principal direct sources. Managers’ deeply held, widely shared, and largely untested perceptions of and assumptions about customers’ changing behaviors overwhelm data describing customers†™ responses to a competitor’s new product introduction. The following words might be heard: â€Å"Customers will quickly see how inferior the competitor’s product is to ours. As soon as they do, they will return to our fold. What goes undeveloped and untested is a set of alternative explanations of the documented customer behaviors and their implications for the organization’s marketing strategy. The obvious implication is that both tacit and explicit knowledge solidify and ossify. Unless distinct modes of reasoning?such as alternative explanations of customers’ responses to a competitor’s new product introduction?are articulated and assessed, radical disjuncture in knowledge content or breakthroughs in insight are considerably less likely to emerge. In short, unless the â€Å"frames†? points of view embodied in perceptions, beliefs, assumptions, and projections about the future? are broken by challenging prevailing modes of thinking and reasoning, knowledge generation and use will be severely restricted. Error 8: Focusing on the Past and the Present and Not the Future If the intent of knowledge is to inform and influence decision making, then its focus must be on the future. Although we cannot know the future, every strategy, decision, and action is, by definition, premised upon some view of the future. Knowledge, as distinguished from raw data and information, can create a shared context for organizational members to address the future. Yet in most organizations, knowledge is still predominantly used for understanding past and present change. The implications of such change for future decision making and action receive only secondary attention at best. A Although some organizations are becoming more enforceable in developing â€Å"memories of the future† through the use of scenarios and other techniques,’ it is still the rare organization that explicitly makes discussing the future the driving focus of its knowledge work. Of course, it hardly needs to be noted that database and information management generally devote little explicit attention to consideration of the future. A number of causes for this error warrant particular attention. First is the greater comfort and ease with which individuals are able to collect data and generate information about the past and the present. Creating explicit projections unavoidably entails making Judgments about the future. The strong natural tendency to avoid the personal, political, and organizational risks associated with exposing one’s thinking and reasoning about the future often conspire to stop development of â€Å"future knowledge† right in its tracks. Second is the common misunderstanding of knowledge and the future: the goal is not to know the future, rather it is to know what projections of the future inform management’s 271 thinking about its strategies and actions. Third is a failure to recognize that alternative projections of the future enlighten our understanding of the present. Moreover, what we take to be knowledge about the present may be largely illusion. As a consequence, the value of our knowledge efforts for decision makers may be far less than we presume. Error 9: Failing to Recognize the Importance of Experimentation Experiments are a crucial source of the data and information necessary for the invigoration of knowledge, and in most respects, the creation of new knowledge. Experiments include trying new approaches to analysis, initiating pilot projects, doing things on a trial-and-error basis, and allowing individuals to assume additional tasks and responsibilities. Customer experiments might include directly involving customers in specific stages of product development, asking and supporting customers to use the product in different ways, and testing new ways to deliver solutions to specific customer segments. Although experiments are a naturally occurring phenomenon in every organizational setting, few organizations explicitly seek to continually create and leverage experiments for knowledge purposes. Indeed, a failure to recognize the potential experimental value of ongoing activities is all too evident in most organizations. For example, many firms now document their â€Å"best raciest† as a means of encapsulating knowledge at work and disseminate such descriptions and results to a wide range of potential internal users. However, such documentation also tends to suppress any inclination to track and monitor improvements and innovations in each best practice as it is applied and enhanced by various user groups. The use of technology tends to result in standardized approaches to collecting and structuring data and to transferring information. This tendency is reinforced by command-and-control, hierarchy-driven organizational cultures that specify precisely what individuals can (and cannot) do. The result is an emphasis on exploitation over exploration. ‘ Organizations invest time and resources in improving current modes of data gathering, enhancing the efficiency of IT, calibrating information structures, and involving more individuals in information and knowledge routines. One consequence of this is an emphasis on simply refining and sharpening what we already know. What is downplayed, and often dismissed entirely, is the willingness to explore: to do new things, to do old things in new ways, and to learn from both these activities. Distinctly new knowledge stems from experimenting. 272 Error 10: Substituting Technological Contact for Human Interface The veritable explosion of information and communication technologies has created the means to capture and transmit data and information at rates and speeds that were unimaginable merely a few years ago. Data warehousing, search engines, groupware, and newly emerging client-server systems are only the tip of the iceberg. Information technology budgets continue to escalate, vendors are sprouting up like mushrooms, IT professionals are increasingly assuming knowledge titles, and many knowledge projects quite rightly depend upon intensive technology use. There is outspread tendency to validate significant investment in IT by reference to its contribution to developing and leveraging knowledge in new and effective ways. Unfortunately, one pivotal error underlying some uses of IT severely limits its potential contribution to organizational knowledge: technological contact is equated with face-to-face dialogue. Although IT is a wonderful facilitator of data and information transmission and distribution, it can never substitute for the rich interactivity, communication, and learning that is inherent in dialogue. Knowledge is primarily a function and consequence of the meeting and interaction of minds. Human intervention remains the only source of knowledge generation. This in turn has produced immense frustration on the part of executives. One result of this frustration is further investment in IT, which without the requisite change in the understanding of knowledge, in turn only leads to further frustration and disappointment. Error 1 1 : Seeking to Develop Direct Measures of Knowledge A reasonable and sensible question now being raised by many concerned senior managers is: How will we know if our efforts to manage knowledge produce satisfactory results? Or, stated differently, where is the pay-off to knowledge projects? Regrettably, it seems that an increasing number of organizations seek to measure knowledge directly rather than by its outcomes, activities, and consequences. Thus, they emphasize the scope, depth, number, and quality of databases; the numbers of individuals, units, and departments connected technologically; the number of requests or â€Å"hits† pertaining to intranets, key knowledge sources, and information pools; and the number, variety, and extensiveness of knowledge projects or initiatives. Yet a moment’s reflection will convince even the most diehard metric devotee that such indicators do not provide any sense of an organization’s stock or low of knowledge or its contribution to decision making and organizational performance. However, some firms have developed â€Å"proxies† for showing the outcomes or consequences of knowledge-based activities. These metrics include patents, new products developed and introduced, customer retention, and process 273 The Eleven Deadliest Sins o f Knowledge Management innovation. Yet it seems fair to suggest that in their thirst for metrics and measures, an embarrassing number of organizations still put the measurement cart before the knowledge horse. This vain pursuit of metrics reinforces many of the errors How to cite Knowledge management, Papers

Knowledge Management Free Essays

Knowledge management in an organisation means to capture the knowledge that is critical to them, constantly improve it and make it available in the most effective manner to those who need it. There are two types of knowledge explicit and tacit. Explicit knowledge is a kind of knowledge that can be expressed in formed E. We will write a custom essay sample on Knowledge Management or any similar topic only for you Order Now g following a procedure. Tacit knowledge is influenced by emotions and beliefs E. g Respect, relationships. Bovis case study throws a light how knowledge management can be difficult for organisations operating globally. There is friction in transfer of knowledge due to cultural factors and sometimes even due to language barriers. Bovis model helps reduce these frictions. In his model group cohesion among members of the knowledge mnanagement team was promoted so that communication barriers are removed. There was weekly conference calls, also team meeting every 6 months in different geographic locations. To remove language barrier english was made as the base language and e-mail acted as a mechanism that communicated queries and solutions in a commom base vehicle. Hoarding of knowledge is a common practice which can lead to limitations to successful communication of knowledge between providers and seekers. Bovis model helps to mitigate these limitations through motivational tactics and linking employee usage to performance reviews. The success of the bovis model lies in the knowledge management team structure and the method he adopted to monitor the success of the knowledge management initiative. Bovis model shows how complex isuues associated with successful implementation of knowledge management in business can be dealt. How to cite Knowledge Management, Papers Knowledge management Free Essays string(40) " what happens between one’s ears\." Prussia core tenet of any organizational learning project is that without detecting and correcting errors in â€Å"what we know† and â€Å"how we learn,† an organization’s knowledge deteriorates, becomes obsolete, and can result in â€Å"bad† decisions. Because systematic attention to knowledge management is relatively recent, it is particularly important to detect these errors so that knowledge management does not become yet another management fad that promised much but delivered little. If we do not identify and try to resolve these errors, â€Å"what we know† about knowledge management may become little else but mythology. We will write a custom essay sample on Knowledge management or any similar topic only for you Order Now As a consequence, we will be faced with the ultimate knowledge irony: efforts to manage knowledge are themselves based upon faulty knowledge principles. The purpose of this article is to draw attention to a set of pervasive knowledge management errors. These reflections are based on the authors’ observing or partaking in over one hundred knowledge projects over the past five years or so. The focus is on fundamental errors, that is, errors that if left unredeemed inhibit genuine knowledge from being developed and leveraged. These are errors associated with he concept of knowledge itself: how knowledge is understood in organizational settings and how that understanding impedes knowledge management. Error l: Not Developing a Working Definition of Knowledge If knowledge is not something that is different from data or information, then there is nothing new or interesting in knowledge management. Yet many managers seem determinedly reluctant to distinguish between data and CALIFORNIA MANAGEMENT REVIEW VOLVO, NO. 3 SPRING 1998 265 The Eleven Deadliest Sins of Knowledge Management information on the one hand and knowledge on the other; and, more importantly, hey seem reluctant to consider the implications of these distinctions. The tendency to avoid grappling with what knowledge is should not be surprising. There is little in the education, training, or organizational experience of managers that prepares them for the deep-seated reflection and understanding required by the concept of knowledge. Moreover, this situation is exacerbated by some recent popular management literature that directly advocates not making distinctions between these concepts. The argument advanced by these authors is that contemplation of such extinctions distracts managers from the necessary task of managing,’ However, reflection upon concepts and the distinctions among and between them is the essence of the process of â€Å"knowing† or learning. This is a critical error. It contributes directly to all of the errors noted below. Also, avoidance of grappling with a working understanding of knowledge leads to a dysfunctional environment for knowledge work. Many executives have told us they were extremely reluctant to even use the knowledge word and that they felt the anti- knowledge culture of their organizations compelled them to do knowledge work by dealt. â€Å"We had to disguise our knowledge project within a data warehousing architecture plan† is a true and representative response. In fairness, firms have been assaulted, at least since the asses, with multitudes of theories and nostrums that have often proved to be of questionable value. This has made many executives skeptical, if not downright hostile, to new ideas and programs. Error 2: Envisaging Knowledge Stock to the Detriment of Knowledge Flow When knowledge is equated with information, it should not be a surprise to find it defined principally as a stock rather than as a flow. It is viewed as a thing or object that exists on its own, that can be captured, transmitted among individuals, and stored in multiple ways within the organization. Indisputably, this â€Å"stock† perspective tends to dominate organizations’ thinking about knowledge. This has come about in part because several early examples of knowledge â€Å"success† focus on articulated and documented stocks of knowledge such as Dhow’s work on patent values and Muckiness’s rapid-response system. The notion of flow, however, suggests a radically different conception of knowledge. It is in constant flux and change. It is central to day-to-day doing and being. Individuals create it and it is largely self-generating. Moreover, it connects, binds, and involves individuals. In short, it is inseparable from the individuals who develop, transmit, and leverage it. The prevalent view of knowledge as stock is grounded in large measure in the thrust of every educational system from grade school through university: learn the facts and regurgitate them as required in the relevant examination. 266 VOLVO 40, NO. 3 This orientation is in turn reflected in and reinforced by the pervasive information genealogy approach to the management of data and information: capture, store, retrieve, and transmit. Although organizations obviously need to manage their data and information using these technology-centered models, knowledge is a substantially different thing and thus needs different models. The implications for how organizations approach all facets of knowledge management are profound. In many firms, knowledge simply becomes another object to be managed. It is viewed as something separate from the organizational processes that help generate and nurture it. Not surprisingly, therefore, managers all too often do not see themselves s part of the knowledge process, but rather see it as happening outside of them. Error 3: Viewing Knowledge as Existing Predominantly Outside the Heads of Individuals Implicit in the observations above is that any discussion of knowledge is meaningless in the absence of a â€Å"knower,† Knowledge is what a knower knows; there is no knowledge without someone knowing it. Knowledge therefore must be viewed as originating â€Å"between the ears† of individuals. Taken literally, the need for a knower raises profound questions as to whether and how knowledge can exist outside the heads of individuals. Although knowledge can be represented in and often embedded in organizational processes, routines, and networks, and sometimes in document repositories, it cannot truly originate outside the heads of individuals. A Nor is it ever complete outside of an individual. In this view, knowledge is shaped by (among other things) one’s initial stock of knowledge, what goes on inside one’s head (that is, how one reasons), and the inflow of new stimuli (such as new data and information). Flow, therefore, is also central to what happens between one’s ears. You read "Knowledge management" in category "Papers" Yet organizations seem to view knowledge as if it has a life of its own. They dub strikingly mundane databases as â€Å"knowledge bases,† they talk of search engines as if they were human brains, and they extol executive expert systems as if the human mind were incidental to their construction and use. This attempt to dress up decades old technologies and concepts in new â€Å"knowledge† clothing is one of the more serious distractions faced by knowledge advocates. In conjunction with an emphasis upon knowledge as stock, this error reinforces organizational tendencies to manage and massage ever more complex and interconnected databases and to construct even more elaborate information structures. This would not be so bad except that it shifts the focus of knowledge and knowledge work away from individuals?without whom knowledge can be neither generated, transmitted, nor used. VOLVO 40, NO, 3 267 The Eleven Deadliest Sins of Knowledge Management Error 4: Not Understanding that a Fundamental Intermediate Purpose of Managing Knowledge Is to Create Shared Context If knowledge exists ultimately within individuals, and it is individuals participating simultaneously in multiple group processes who make and execute key decisions, then a fundamental purpose of â€Å"managing knowledge† must be to build some degree of shared context. Shared context† means a shared understanding of an organization’s external and internal worlds and how these worlds are connected. Shared context is dynamic: knowledge as flow implies that any shared understanding is likely to change over time, and sometimes may do so suddenly. In the absence of shared context, individuals’ differing perspectives, beliefs, assumptions, and views of the future are most likely to collide and thus immobile decision making. Yet many organizations still appear so caught up in the model of knowledge as stock that explicating, challenging, and aligning distinct views receives little systematic attention. In short, individuals’ understanding of the world around them?perhaps the most critical link between knowledge and decision making?is ignored. This error obviously stems from a â€Å"stock† view of knowledge, but its roots lie deep in the prevailing cultures of most organizations. Establishing, challenging, and aligning shared context requires decision makers to engage in open, honest, supportive (and yet critical), and reflective dialogue. ‘ However, knowledge is a direct outcome of experiences, reflection, and dialogue?three activities that use up that most precious managerial asset: namely, time. Few firms feel they can afford to budget directly for these activities, yet little knowledge is ever developed without them. A disregard for shared context means that the generation, transmission, and use of knowledge is not seen as an activity that brings individuals to deeper understanding through dialogue. As a result, information remains simply a pattern of disjointed and ill-structured data points or events. Without such dialogue the path from information to knowledge is difficult to traverse. Error 5: Paying Little Heed to the Role and Importance of Tacit Knowledge A â€Å"head centered† (or perhaps, more accurately, an embodied) view recognizes the central role of tacit knowledge in shaping and influencing explicit knowledge. Tacit knowledge entails a body of perspectives (e. G. , our view of customers is framed by our firm’s experience in North America), perceptions (customers seem disinclined to try our new product), beliefs (investment in new technology will lead to breakthrough new products that will create new customer needs), and values (do what is right for the customer). Tacit knowledge is the means by which explicit knowledge is captured, assimilated, created, and disseminated. 268 VOLVO. 40, NO. Yet in spite of the emphasis upon tacit knowledge in both traditional epistemology and the recent knowledge management literature, organizations seem especially reluctant to grapple with its management. One unfortunate consequence is that in redoubling their commitment to managing explicit knowledge, organizations discover to th eir dismay that their efforts are thwarted by the very phenomenon they choose to downplay or ignore. As more emphasis is placed upon refining and extending customer satisfaction surveys, managers’ perceptions, projections, and values intervene to preclude any genuinely new insights into customers’ behavior. The most profound reason for this error is that managers simply do not understand the nature of tacit knowledge, its attributes, or its consequences. Thus, although they admit it is â€Å"there,† they fear it is inaccessible and impossible to influence. Thus, their own tacit knowledge about knowledge serves to limit their understanding of the real nature of knowledge?both tacit and explicit. If this error persists, the development and leveraging of explicit knowledge is largely stifled. Consider the following case. One organization considered its extensive services to be the dominant reason its customers continued to do more business with it. In in-depth interviews with many of these customers, however, service was ranked as only the fifth or sixth most important purchase criterion. Yet, key members of the management team not only refused to believe the interview findings, they steadfastly refused to entertain the possibility that their long-held semi-tacit assumption might be wrong. Error 6: Disentangling Knowledge from Its Uses Knowledge is about imbuing data and information with decision- and action-relevant meaning. This is the vital role of human intervention. Information about customers becomes knowledge when decision makers determine how to take advantage of the information. In this way, knowledge is inseparable from thinking and acting (see Error 7). Yet many organizations disconnect knowledge from its uses. A major manifestation of this error is that so-called knowledge initiatives, projects, and programs become ends in themselves. Data warehousing, customer satisfaction surveys, and industry scenarios degenerate respectively into technological challenges, management games, and clashes among proponents of different scenario methodologies. Their relevance for decisions and actions gets lost in the turmoil spawned by debates about appropriate data structures, best survey designs, and alternative techniques for imagining specific industry futures. This error arises directly from a number of decisively false assumptions in the way many organizations approach knowledge management. First, access to information is not equivalent to insight, value, or utility. Examples of managers recognizing in retrospect how they should have derived insight from particular data and information are legend in every company. Second, the value of data 269 ND information is often anything but obvious. Sometimes it is only after considerable discussion and dialogue that the decision relevance and usefulness of data and information becomes evident. Discerning the appropriate marketing strategy responses to new requests of key customers often requires extensive analysis and detailed projections of the forces shaping customers’ behaviors. Third, a common tendency to firmly segregate knowledge users (â€Å"decision makers†) from many of those involved in generating knowledge further serves to separate knowledge from its potential uses. The universal use of the term â€Å"knowledge worker,† s distinct from workers who presumably don’t have or use knowledge, is a prime indicator of how common this sort of error is. A recent survey by Mark Fruit on how knowledge is understood and valued at Toshiba points out the fatuousness of these labels. ‘ A critical implication of this error is that the knowledge efforts of many organizations are misdirected. In short, they frequently commit extensive resources and time to refining and perfecting data and information at the expense of deriving decision and action implications. This tendency is vividly manifest in the extraordinary lengths to which many organizations go to ensure that their customer surveys meet every statistical standard, that unbiased questions are posed, and that the data collection process does not influence the results. Only later is it discovered that the data generated is not terribly helpful in many critical marketing decisions and actions (such as the design of new products, changes to current marketing strategy, or development of rapid responses to the actions of competitors). Error 7: Downplaying Thinking and Reasoning Knowledge generation and use at the level of individuals and groups is a never- ending work-in-progress. At its core, however, getting to different states of knowledge development requires some form of reasoning. For example, a sequence of observations about how customers use a product may lead to insights about desired product modifications, potential new customer solutions, or ways in which existing products might be better customized to specific customers’ needs. Explicating thinking and reasoning processes is especially critical in the case of explicit knowledge. Yet it is always a shock to observe how little attention is paid by allegedly well- managed organizations to their modes of reasoning: the nature of the analytics inherent in points of view or arguments; the assumptions underlying particular models and metaphors; or the relationship between a mode of reasoning and its â€Å"logical† outcomes and consequences. Organizations are thus often unaware why changes occur in a particular stock of explicit knowledge. Hence, they are unable to test the rationales for or validity of such changes. While there are many organizational causes of this error (e. . , an organization’s culture does not tolerate articulation and consideration of conflicts in reasoning), the dominance and pervasiveness of tacit knowledge is one of its 270 principal direct sources. Managers’ deeply held, widely shared, and largely untested perceptions of and assumptions about customers’ changing behaviors overwhelm data describing customers†™ responses to a competitor’s new product introduction. The following words might be heard: â€Å"Customers will quickly see how inferior the competitor’s product is to ours. As soon as they do, they will return to our fold. What goes undeveloped and untested is a set of alternative explanations of the documented customer behaviors and their implications for the organization’s marketing strategy. The obvious implication is that both tacit and explicit knowledge solidify and ossify. Unless distinct modes of reasoning?such as alternative explanations of customers’ responses to a competitor’s new product introduction?are articulated and assessed, radical disjuncture in knowledge content or breakthroughs in insight are considerably less likely to emerge. In short, unless the â€Å"frames†? points of view embodied in perceptions, beliefs, assumptions, and projections about the future? are broken by challenging prevailing modes of thinking and reasoning, knowledge generation and use will be severely restricted. Error 8: Focusing on the Past and the Present and Not the Future If the intent of knowledge is to inform and influence decision making, then its focus must be on the future. Although we cannot know the future, every strategy, decision, and action is, by definition, premised upon some view of the future. Knowledge, as distinguished from raw data and information, can create a shared context for organizational members to address the future. Yet in most organizations, knowledge is still predominantly used for understanding past and present change. The implications of such change for future decision making and action receive only secondary attention at best. A Although some organizations are becoming more enforceable in developing â€Å"memories of the future† through the use of scenarios and other techniques,’ it is still the rare organization that explicitly makes discussing the future the driving focus of its knowledge work. Of course, it hardly needs to be noted that database and information management generally devote little explicit attention to consideration of the future. A number of causes for this error warrant particular attention. First is the greater comfort and ease with which individuals are able to collect data and generate information about the past and the present. Creating explicit projections unavoidably entails making Judgments about the future. The strong natural tendency to avoid the personal, political, and organizational risks associated with exposing one’s thinking and reasoning about the future often conspire to stop development of â€Å"future knowledge† right in its tracks. Second is the common misunderstanding of knowledge and the future: the goal is not to know the future, rather it is to know what projections of the future inform management’s 271 thinking about its strategies and actions. Third is a failure to recognize that alternative projections of the future enlighten our understanding of the present. Moreover, what we take to be knowledge about the present may be largely illusion. As a consequence, the value of our knowledge efforts for decision makers may be far less than we presume. Error 9: Failing to Recognize the Importance of Experimentation Experiments are a crucial source of the data and information necessary for the invigoration of knowledge, and in most respects, the creation of new knowledge. Experiments include trying new approaches to analysis, initiating pilot projects, doing things on a trial-and-error basis, and allowing individuals to assume additional tasks and responsibilities. Customer experiments might include directly involving customers in specific stages of product development, asking and supporting customers to use the product in different ways, and testing new ways to deliver solutions to specific customer segments. Although experiments are a naturally occurring phenomenon in every organizational setting, few organizations explicitly seek to continually create and leverage experiments for knowledge purposes. Indeed, a failure to recognize the potential experimental value of ongoing activities is all too evident in most organizations. For example, many firms now document their â€Å"best raciest† as a means of encapsulating knowledge at work and disseminate such descriptions and results to a wide range of potential internal users. However, such documentation also tends to suppress any inclination to track and monitor improvements and innovations in each best practice as it is applied and enhanced by various user groups. The use of technology tends to result in standardized approaches to collecting and structuring data and to transferring information. This tendency is reinforced by command-and-control, hierarchy-driven organizational cultures that specify precisely what individuals can (and cannot) do. The result is an emphasis on exploitation over exploration. ‘ Organizations invest time and resources in improving current modes of data gathering, enhancing the efficiency of IT, calibrating information structures, and involving more individuals in information and knowledge routines. One consequence of this is an emphasis on simply refining and sharpening what we already know. What is downplayed, and often dismissed entirely, is the willingness to explore: to do new things, to do old things in new ways, and to learn from both these activities. Distinctly new knowledge stems from experimenting. 272 Error 10: Substituting Technological Contact for Human Interface The veritable explosion of information and communication technologies has created the means to capture and transmit data and information at rates and speeds that were unimaginable merely a few years ago. Data warehousing, search engines, groupware, and newly emerging client-server systems are only the tip of the iceberg. Information technology budgets continue to escalate, vendors are sprouting up like mushrooms, IT professionals are increasingly assuming knowledge titles, and many knowledge projects quite rightly depend upon intensive technology use. There is outspread tendency to validate significant investment in IT by reference to its contribution to developing and leveraging knowledge in new and effective ways. Unfortunately, one pivotal error underlying some uses of IT severely limits its potential contribution to organizational knowledge: technological contact is equated with face-to-face dialogue. Although IT is a wonderful facilitator of data and information transmission and distribution, it can never substitute for the rich interactivity, communication, and learning that is inherent in dialogue. Knowledge is primarily a function and consequence of the meeting and interaction of minds. Human intervention remains the only source of knowledge generation. This in turn has produced immense frustration on the part of executives. One result of this frustration is further investment in IT, which without the requisite change in the understanding of knowledge, in turn only leads to further frustration and disappointment. Error 1 1 : Seeking to Develop Direct Measures of Knowledge A reasonable and sensible question now being raised by many concerned senior managers is: How will we know if our efforts to manage knowledge produce satisfactory results? Or, stated differently, where is the pay-off to knowledge projects? Regrettably, it seems that an increasing number of organizations seek to measure knowledge directly rather than by its outcomes, activities, and consequences. Thus, they emphasize the scope, depth, number, and quality of databases; the numbers of individuals, units, and departments connected technologically; the number of requests or â€Å"hits† pertaining to intranets, key knowledge sources, and information pools; and the number, variety, and extensiveness of knowledge projects or initiatives. Yet a moment’s reflection will convince even the most diehard metric devotee that such indicators do not provide any sense of an organization’s stock or low of knowledge or its contribution to decision making and organizational performance. However, some firms have developed â€Å"proxies† for showing the outcomes or consequences of knowledge-based activities. These metrics include patents, new products developed and introduced, customer retention, and process 273 The Eleven Deadliest Sins o f Knowledge Management innovation. Yet it seems fair to suggest that in their thirst for metrics and measures, an embarrassing number of organizations still put the measurement cart before the knowledge horse. This vain pursuit of metrics reinforces many of the errors How to cite Knowledge management, Papers